Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Elephant

Kakafika's page

Goblin Squad Member. 666 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 666 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kadere wrote:
EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS WRONG GRR

NO THEY AREN'T!!!!

PHAEROS WILL BURN YOUR SETTLEMENT TO THE GROUND FOR THIS TRANSGRESSION!

Goblin Squad Member

I lol'd

Goblin Squad Member

6 people marked this as a favorite.
<Kabal> Daeglin wrote:
I am amazed and disappointed even, by the people who still don't know or accept what the design of this game has always been proposed to be. GW and Ryan have been remarkably consistent in stating their vision of open world pvp with consequences. I come from a tabletop background going back to the blue box, I've played some themepark WoW. I read the kickstarter, I read the blogs describing the overarching goals of the game. I joined expecting to have to learn to protect myself and my settlement at all times. I expect to learn to pvp. I expect to die. I expect to lose gear and resources. I just don't understand the willfull attempts to ignore everything that Goblinworks has always said this game will be.

I agree.

It is true that some sociopaths are playing PFO and killing characters and taking their stuff, but not all people killing characters and taking their stuff are sociopaths.

It's like people have never played competitive sports before, or something...

In American Football, one guy hits another guy and takes the Basic Stitched Leather +3 he drops.

The rules of this game are that you can kill other characters and take their stuff; that is one of the ways you compete.

I have attacked 2 poachers in EBA lands (Note: I have since learned it is currently against EBA policy to attack poachers not affiliated with belligerents). I ran one off, and one fought and died and called me a douche (both after several attempts at contact, suggestions to gather elsewhere and trade, and at least 10 minutes of non-action). I said 'sorry,' and told him he could return to his corpse and retrieve what remained of his goods. I did that because a person that has intimate knowledge of the rules would not have called me a douche; this person needed coaching, not to be 'taught a lesson.' When I got another reply that didn't include an insult, I gave an explanation of my actions and some pointers.

I did this because I want to be known as a good player, which has nothing to do with my character's alignment.

It is and will always be incredibly important to teach new players the rules of the game. My hope is that all players will be motivated by this tragedy to consider how they, personally, can better teach their fellow players how the game is played. It isn't required, it's a bit of a chore, but it's good sportsmanship, and I think the majority of us are interested in being good sports while we compete.

EDIT: To add, I did not attack ANY possible poachers when we had that rush of new faces at the end of January/beginning of February. A little restraint was warranted.

Goblin Squad Member

TEO Cheatle wrote:

Kakafika,

That is because they don't hear me come into TS and ask if anyone has 25,000 coal....

Yeah, that really opened my eyes to the scale that TEO is working on... =P

Goblin Squad Member

Gol Guurzak wrote:
I'm perfectly willing to accept Cheatle's assurance that this was a misstatement rather than an admission, and I'm ready to stop talking about this whenever y'all are.

You guys must not spend as much time in the south as I thought =P

randomwalker wrote:

It would surprise me greatly if any individual has greater wealth than the combined wealth of the largest group in the game.

TEO has a centralised economy where Michelle essentially holds all TEOs gathered, refined and crafted items not currently in use by players. Which is ...a whole lot of items.

I will be awed if Cheatle's statement isn't fact. Based on the evidence, I find it laughable to doubt it... but perhaps that's just my particular perspective =)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find it hilarious that anybody thought to question Cheatle's statement *chuckles*

Goblin Squad Member

I'm all-for rep-free PvP in monster home/escalation hexes. There are few enough of these, they are easily identifiable, and they are rewarding enough that it makes sense to increase the player activity and danger there.

Make these dangerous places where only the most well-prepared, hardened characters venture, and MONSTERS rule the land according to their whims.

"Sure, travel far from town in search of riches, to the lands of Ogg and his followers. A nasty sort frequents that place; and then there's Ogg! Don't expect anybody to be concerned or surprised by what happens to you there. You've been warned."

Goblin Squad Member

Maybe SENSOU will deem this activity worthy of starting another 'war.'
Or maybe not.

Goblin Squad Member

PFO put Pyronous Rath's face in the grass.

Pyronous is mad.

Nothing to see here, move along.

EDIT for Carbon: PFO > Pathfinder

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gol Guurzak wrote:
I don't believe this committee recognizes motions from pachyderms.

You don't have to recognize them, but I might make you feel them.

/stamp

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hereby move to name February 30th as official "Kobold Disappreciation Day"

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, to sum up this thread:

T2 pants prevent getting wood

Goblin Squad Member

Being is KC's puppet? SPIES IN PHAEROS!!!11!

Goblin Squad Member

I hope to be relatively successful as a merchant/gatherer by minimizing my PvP losses through stealth, guile, diplomacy, and swift vengeance.

Goblin Squad Member

Player-run Farms and Lumberyards will be POIs, I think.

The explanation given by the developers is that when we enter the world, we only see ourselves, the elite adventurers, gatherers, and craft foremen. In the background, there is a multitude of 'small folk' keeping our settlements running (manning the auction house, doing the actual crafting, etc).

These small folk will be more noticeable, though still invisible and abstracted, when the War of Towers ends and settlements start dealing with Development Indices. One of the resources is Bulk Food used to feed them and grow the population.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tyveil wrote:
My experience for probably the first week of playing was largely the same as yours, very frustrating. The number of feats at the start is overwhelming. They need to do something to make this easier for new players, though I'm not sure what that will be. Since so much to do with feats is based on matching keywords, I think that matching keyword highlighting will help. But I do also think they should somehow reduce the number of feats available at the start.

I thought this at the beginning, too, but kept my mouth shut until I had a better understanding of the game systems.

Now, I'm confident they could narrow down the number of combat feats (maybe attacks, armor, and role feature feats) for new players without making things 'weird' or 'unfair.' One option is to gate half of them behind Adventurer 1 (or 2), which should take minutes/hours for a new player, in which time they can get a handle on how combat works before they start getting into the details. A few hundred XP can be made up in a few hours.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm glad to see the two Chaotic, hands-off settlements sticking to their alignments/philosophies as best they can.

I would offer in-game support if I weren't so sure I'd be robbed or murdered on the way due to my affiliations =)

Goblin Squad Member

I agree with the OP. I'll be surprised if this isn't already part of the plan. I suggest a 15-30 second timer that will be interrupted by taking any action (that affects the world) or damage.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Yrme wrote:
then even the most dull-witted and unimaginative midden-digger needs it too.

Scavenger here, considering picking up energetic field to better outrun bandits (but haven't yet)...

wut r u sayin bro?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

inb4 lock

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think when do they die it should because the grass.

You know?

Goblin Squad Member

Server downtime is the same time every day (shown in the patcher). I have missed it myself a few times but I'm learning... =P

Goblin Squad Member

I think they said the Mordant Spire will only spread to 2 neighboring hexes (for now).

Goblin Squad Member

PFO is about meaningful human interaction. Reaching the end-game requires a certain amount of social investment.

Gaskon wrote:
Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:
I didn't get to vote on anything. I had no say or influence.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Perhaps it is a problem with your current settlement's structure?

I voted in the landrush, I am very happy with my settlement, and I am content with the amount of influence I currently have over my settlement's policies.

In a year or so, there will be an opportunity for dissatisfied players to create new settlements of their own, or attempt to burn down the ones that rejected them.

This. In PFO it's a lot easier to 'vote with your feet' (move to someplace better) than in the real world.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Harneloot wrote:
Kyutaru wrote:

A preview of PVP in the post-patch future:

You are out farming mobs or harvesting, obviously with several friends nearby. The puller takes the next mob group, then dies rather quickly. Perhaps you have overestimated this group's strength? No, you were certain only two purples existed and neither are mages.

Meanwhile, a Longbow-wielding Daredevil in Archer armor with MoO: Suffer and Stop enters Stealth once again and retreats to a safe distance, hopefully not having been noticed while the rest of your group was handling the camp mobs.

After a number of suspiciously unsuccessful pulls, you realize what's happening and advance the Logs agenda on the crowdforging site.

Anyone, anywhere, anytime; you can and will die to assassins, but will you even notice?

Unless they have been specifically hired to kill that person or are defending territory, why would anyone play the game like that? Just to make other players miserable? Why would anyone play a game just to make other people have less fun?

This seems perfectly legitimate to me, as well. What Kyutaru did not include was the reason this assassin was doing this, which may be why there is confusion. As Tink and Bludd already pointed out, there are various reasons: resource denial, hampering an enemy (if they are not war/feud targets, it will come at a large rep cost), territorial protection, or even just honing your assassin skills (again, at a large rep cost if not a war/feud target).

This is not like PvP in WoW; many might consider this sort of behavior in WoW as mean-spirited or unsportsmanlike (I wouldn't, depending on a few factors), because the assassin's guild does not gain a significant advantage by hampering your advancement.

I have never played a game where the risks/rewards for PvP were greater than what I could personally gain/lose from looting/dying, so I haven't thought everything through just yet. However, it seems to me that the Reputation mechanic is designed such that doing something like this against a group that is not an enemy (i.e. war/feud target) is a decision that must be made carefully. If you randomly kill people, your reputation will tank and you won't be able to 'use it' killing non-war targets that you might have better reasons for killing (gathering your resources near your settlement, scouting your territory/towers, etc).

TL;DR If in Kyutaru's example the assassin chose this group at random, he/she will quickly lose rep and will have to stop or be forced to live with the consequences for awhile. If there is no rep-loss from the kills, there exists a myriad of legitimate reasons for the assassin to kill them. In other words, you are right, Harneloot; if they are doing it for no other reason than 'for the lulz,' the game will punish them through the reputation mechanic. The reputation mechanic will also punish them for legitimate reasons (defending territory, etc), which makes for interesting choices about how settlements will enforce 'no trespassing' rules... and I like that =)

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
Kakafika wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:

I personally would not respawn camp someone unless they are a feud or war target, or they have shown they are posing a consistent threat to a tower we hold.

This is especially true if they express that they are trying to vacate the area, or I can see that they are trying to.

if you try to take what you have left behind, that is a NO NO, your loot belongs to me!!

Basically this, except I'm not sure I would spawncamp somebody only because they are a feud or war target.
Spawn camping a feud or war target is one way of keeping them off the battlefield. All is fare in warfare!! You can not grief a war target, especially one who is on the side that started the war.

That's why I said "I'm not sure." =)

We will see what makes sense to me when it happens... I don't have any experience with PvP like this.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:

I personally would not respawn camp someone unless they are a feud or war target, or they have shown they are posing a consistent threat to a tower we hold.

This is especially true if they express that they are trying to vacate the area, or I can see that they are trying to.

if you try to take what you have left behind, that is a NO NO, your loot belongs to me!!

Basically this, except I'm not sure I would spawncamp somebody only because they are a feud or war target.

Goblin Squad Member

This will be a useful tool when I try to calculate how far away from Bluddwolf I need to be for my coin to be not worth his time =)

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think Scorchbark had more to do with his embarrassment than sspitfire did.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
0: You have what you hold.

This is really what I think it will come down to. Neighbors will naturally try to avoid conflict at home by making agreements, but I don't see why anybody else would respect those agreements.

The only River Kingdoms-wide agreement I know of is the NAP which covers the core 6 towers around a settlement. Those towers allow a PC settlement to offer more training than an NPC settlement. That is the point that most can get behind e). After that point, I think e) will dwindle to the dedicated few pacifists and those that in reality have an interest in one or the other party. I don't know everybody, and definitely not more people than Thod, so I could be wrong; we will see =)

Goblin Squad Member

Thod wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
Thod wrote:
a) Proximity - the closer the tower is to you, the stronger the claim

I think you need to consider the possibility that your particular reading of this point may not be as pertinent to other Settlements that aren't in your situation - namely, Settlements that are in alliances where Tower assignments aren't based on proximity to a single Settlement.

Specifically, you've told me before that you won't recognize a claim by Phaeros of a Tower that's 2 hexes away from Hammerfall, if it's closer to Emerald Lodge than it is to Phaeros. Given that Hammerfall is a close ally of Phaeros, and given that Hammerfall and Phaeros (along with our other allies) made our internal Tower assignments based on what's best for the alliance as a whole rather than what's best for any single Settlement, I would ask you to publicly clarify your reading of "proximity".

People should read everything and not pick out what they like or dislike depending on who posts it.

The claim in this case would be covered under c). So this is a great example that you actually already follow what I have written.

I think he was specifically asking if you accept the transfer of Hammerfall's claims to those towers to Phaeros, as described by method c).

I don't think there was any malicious discrimination there, just a practical clarification and a question whether you agree, given a past statement =)

It's possible that when you made that post you didn't know that Hammerfall had done that (I can't find your post to reference).

Goblin Squad Member

This may be the most interesting story to come out of PFO yet! I look forward to its happy conclusion.

Goblin Squad Member

Thank you for sharing this guide!

Goblin Squad Member

You're normally so polite, I think we can forgive any missteps :)

Best wishes for you and your family, and here's to a more fortunate 2015! *clink*

Goblin Squad Member

Happy holidays! =)

Goblin Squad Member

Good luck, hope to see you around soon!

Goblin Squad Member

Andius the Afflicted wrote:
3. Edit Function - Will we able to edit posts? How long after they are posted can we edit them?

I hope they allow unlimited editing of OPs, so recruitment and information threads don't need to be constantly re-posted as things change =)

Goblin Squad Member

I agree with you your goal completely, Guurzak. Here's how I've been thinking about fast travel in PFO (besides thinking along the same lines as the above posters):

The geography is such that there are only a handful of chokepoints at which to access another 'elevation,' which increases the number of hexes needed to travel to reach a destination. It also potentially increases the risk of bumping into bandits.

Bandits will be able to Ambush people out of Fast Travel (this used to be a function of the now defunct hideout structure, but I think bandits can still do this). I also seem to remember mention of NPC monsters from nearby escalations possibly being able to do the same, but I could be wrong there (in which case, add it, GW! Another good reason to have a strong force of PvEers in your settlement: clear escalations from major highways!)

I hope there will be ways for settlements and/or POIs to affect fast travel in their areas.

Goblin Squad Member

That write-up is sexy.

I have come to hold many of you in high regard, and wish Ozem's Vigil the best of luck in the Land Rush!

Goblin Squad Member

I hadn't even considered the possibility that DT's might not be in on day 1.

Goblin Squad Member

FMS Quietus wrote:

I never defined what the two large groups are. I would never suggest that members of either group all felt the same way and never suggested as such.

I will say that there is no settlement or company that I'm aware of that is a part of both the Northern Coalition and the Accord. There was and still is an 'Us vs Them' mentality on both sides. I know this because we have found ourselves at times caught in the middle of that very situation. That is what I'm commenting on and this is from personal experience.

Now to your second and most offensive comment. You challenge Ozem's Vigil as being independent. I challenge you to tell me what we have done to 'drag Pax's rhetoric in here.' I want specifics on what I said in that quote above that in anyway is "Pax's rhetoric."

Rhetoric btw has a negative connotation.
Here's the definition for you:
: language that is intended to influence people and that may not be honest or reasonable.
here's the link
Your question about our independence by saying "if" and using the word "rhetoric" already tells me about your preconceived biased outlook and why you probably "cringed" to respond.

But continuing on...you ask that we could demonstrate it?
How about this. We have nothing to prove to you.

Instead, how about you demonstrate something to me and have the Accord offer an olive branch out to Aeternum and Golgotha. Ask them to join your Accord.

You want to say there isn't an "Us VS Them" mentality? Prove it.

It would make the rest of us that are independent...yes...really independent...lives a lot easier in dealing with negotiations on future settlements.

I'm over the drama and done playing.

And for the record - reading your reply was just as cringing, so consider us even.

*DE-ESCALATION, ENGAGED*

I am not going to respond, because you already know that I was referring to T7V vs Pax as the 'rhetoric' I thought you brought in here (and yes I did use the word purposefully). There was a time of confusion when some believed the issue was simply a political battle between 2 large groups; I just wanted to point out that the evidence out there is to the contrary.

We do not want to derail this perfectly fine thread by bringing up the thread that shall not be named, right?

Like I said, I tried to keep the drama level low in my posts, but I anticipated a flare-up =/ Sorry for my part in dredging this up, all!

Editted to be better...

Goblin Squad Member

Ok so now I see my problem, after realizing which settlement icon was for Thod's friends... I actually thought the Emerald Spire was located in the strange swamplands between Z and Y!

I see now the 7 plains hexes between Golgotha and Thod's Friends must be the Emerald Spire. Thanks for clearing that up for me, sorry! Carry on...

Goblin Squad Member

I think you bring up some important points to think on, Calidor. I especially agree that the first impression is a big deal. I think I've only ever seen 2 reviews for MMOs after they have had some patches, and I didn't end up buying the games despite my interest because my buddies had already shunned them.

This quote gives me a lot of hope:

Ryan Dancey wrote:
I think that if I had seen Rust before we planned Pathfinder Online we might have risked a much more minimum game than we did. As it is, we're still pretty "minimum" compared to what most people think of when they think of an MMO, but there's a pretty robust game in there already. It's a long way more complex than Rust.

Of course, as you said (along with Morbis in the quoted thread), the subscription model adds another element to the equation.

Goblin Squad Member

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:
Kakafika wrote:

Indeed. I tried to keep my post short!

Like I said in my post, which you took care to quote, many people from T7V were 'pro-Golgotha,' so I find it difficult to perceive it as T7V vs. Golgotha.

The only large group that all came out on one side of the issue was Pax. Pax Aeternum, Golgotha, and Fidelis. As I said, those weren't the only people that held that position.

EDIT: And of course there were numerous people from all groups, large and small, that simply didn't voice their opinions, feeling it wasn't worth getting tangled up in the situation =P

First, sorry if my post came off as poking anyone in the eye; I certainly didn't and don't mean any harm by it. I should have phrased it as a question to Kakafika, because it's obvious now that I misread his post.

I assumed your first sentence meant something you didn't mean by it by parsing it differently than intended. I read it as "one large group on one side vs. many persons from diverse small groups on the other", and I thought by that you were saying the argument was Pax against the rest of the community. With your explanation it's obvious that is not what was meant. No harm no foul, as they say.

I tried my darnedest not to post during all the arguments except to throw in some levity. Believe me, I had at least a dozen rather heated posts that I deleted before submitting when I realized they would do nothing but add fuel to the fire.

I didn't see it that way; no worries. And I was doing likewise; simply trying to block the eye poke (scroll down to the first photo) =P

I was cringing while posting what I did because I was anticipating some would read what they expected to see and not what I wanted to communicate. I actually breathed a sigh of relief when I saw Morbis's post (before he edited to address mine). I recognize I should have made it clearer for those that specifically avoided that thread that Pax had non-Pax support; anybody that didn't avoid that thread certainly came away from it seeing that it was a very divisive subject for the community.

Goblin Squad Member

If I'm not mistaken, that's swampland around the Spire, rather than plains. It may be portrayed differently in the PnP materials, I haven't taken a look yet =)

Goblin Squad Member

Indeed. I tried to keep my post short!

Like I said in my post, which you took care to quote, many people from T7V were 'pro-Golgotha,' so I find it difficult to perceive it as T7V vs. Golgotha.

The only large group that all came out on one side of the issue was Pax. Pax Aeternum, Golgotha, and Fidelis. As I said, those weren't the only people that held that position.

EDIT: And of course there were numerous people from all groups, large and small, that simply didn't voice their opinions, feeling it wasn't worth getting tangled up in the situation =P

Goblin Squad Member

It is my understanding that you begin using your Kickstarter play time when you activate your account to enter the world. I believe this was stated several times in various places, but unfortunately it was so long ago I can't remember where =P

So for me, depending on how Alpha looks at the end, I may wait a few months until more of the systems that I'm interested in have entered the game

EDIT: That's what I get for leaving my browser open for 13 minutes before responding ><

Goblin Squad Member

Lam wrote:
Putting name or other words with a crafted item is not minimum viable product and has resource and complexity issues. Look to be much later and may involve store. As an example, could more than one person use same label? How much more to have unique or sole user of a label?

Hmm, yeah maybe naming an item should be a store item. A player could purchase the ability to rename an item and send the name they want in for approval. That way they could charge $1 or w/e to cover the costs of having a goblin browse through a list of suggested names once a day to 'ok' them. Of course, a player should thread their named items to avoid losing them =)

Goblin Squad Member

Am I The Only One? wrote:
It isn't these guys?

aaaaahhhahahahahaha

thanks for sharing that. wonderfully absurd

Goblin Squad Member

FMS Quietus wrote:
Two large groups having a spat does not equate to the whole community. I agree with you about drama and not having time for it. Ozem's Vigil is the ONLY settlement in the top ten that's independent. We stand firm in our independence and will form alliances on a case by case basis per settlement for now. More groups have stepped forward as well with the same stance. I'm happy to see this because it starts to tear down the Us vs Them mentality that's been prevalent of late.

It was not two large groups, it was one large group and many persons from diverse groups, a handful of which were from another large group... a group from which many other members held an opposing view.

If Ozem's Vigil is independent, you could demonstrate it by not dragging Pax's rhetoric in here.

I'm making this short and sweet because I'm cringing posting this almost as much as when I read the above quote ><

1 to 50 of 666 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.